The Bull Elephant
  • Home
  • About The Bull Elephant
  • Fun Stuff
  • Contact The Bull Elephant
Latest Posts
How the GOP can win the next election
Get ready for the RPV ‘Dirge’
The Consequences of Failure
Shaun Kenney returning to RPV
Make the 6th District Republican Party Great Again!
Retirement Lies and Statistics
Revolution

The Bull Elephant

  • Home
  • About The Bull Elephant
  • Fun Stuff
  • Contact The Bull Elephant

NAACP v. Alabama for the 21st Century

written by Guest Contributor Mark Fitzgibbons September 1, 2015

In the 1950s, many politicians wanted to silence the civil rights movement. Doing their bidding, Alabama Attorney General John Patterson tried to subpoena the names and addresses of the NAACP’s members, which was a creative way to intimidate people from joining the movement.

Fortunately, Patterson was rebuffed by the Supreme Court in its1958 landmark opinion NAACP v. Alabama, holding that his demands violated the First Amendment right of private association.

Now, California’s Democrat Attorney General Kamala Harris is adding a new, extortionate twist to old tricks. Ms. Harris oversees licensing of charities and other nonprofits that wish to ask Californians for contributions, and under threat of fines and loss of tax-exempt status is demanding that nonprofit registrants file with her office their confidential federal tax return schedule listing their top donors. The ambitious Ms. Harris, by the bye, is running for U.S. Senate, and is raising money for that race.

Federal law protects confidential tax return information, so much so that federal and state officials who may legally view this information are subject to criminal penalties for unlawfully disclosing it. The schedule of donors Ms. Harris wants her and her staff to see is confidential for obvious reasons. She is trying to do what Alabama Attorney General Patterson wanted to do in the 1950s, but using a more arbitrary, dragnet approach.

John Patterson sought the names and addresses of NAACP’s members in Alabama. Ms. Harris wants the names of donors who don’t even reside in California, but who have given to an organization that asks Californians for donations.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied injunctive relief sought by the Center for Competitive Politics against Ms. Harris. CCP was founded by former Federal Election Commission Chairman Brad Smith, an actual First Amendment scholar.

CCP is now asking the Supreme Court to hear its appeal, and is supported by a brief filed by 58 “friends of the court” that includes nationally recognized conservative nonprofit organizations such as Media Research Center, Concerned Women for America, Citizens United, Family Research Council, Faith & Freedom Coalition, the Weyrich Lunch and Leadership Institute.

Another prominent organization on the brief is the National Organization for Marriage, whose donor names were leaked by the Internal Revenue Service to hostile blogs.

Some background to this case includes Lois Lerner, former director of the IRS’ Exempt Organizations Unit, who when busy discriminating against conservatives was also collaborating extensively with state charity regulators and their umbrella organization, the National Association of State Charity Officials (NASCO). This lends more than a whiff of bad intent to what Harris is doing.

Nonprofits focus on many issues — controversial and not — such as medicine and science, religion and politics, cures for diseases, feeding the poor, housing the homeless, caring for wounded veterans and their families, providing care for abused and abandoned animals and promoting safety in our communities. Some inform citizens about civil liberties, the Constitution and the law. Many criticize actions taken by the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government, and thus are independent checks on government.

Donations to nonprofits are a valuable and irreplaceable means of private association integral to nongovernmental, Tocquevillian democracy in American society, and for the benefit of people, animals and the environment.

Ms. Harris has no business intruding in the private relationships between donors and nonprofits, but has not been dissuaded by federal law, the First Amendment or good judgment.

This is not just a problem of Democrats in government abusing power against conservatives. Creative methods of censorship are “bipartisan.”

As progressive fundraiser extraordinaire Roger Craver writes at his Agitator blog for nonprofit communications, “It doesn’t matter whether your organization is ideologically ‘liberal,’ ‘conservative,’ ‘neutral’ or ‘agnostic,’ the threat to free speech and due process is exactly the same.”

NAACP v. Alabama for the 21st Century was last modified: September 1st, 2015 by Guest Contributor Mark Fitzgibbons
First AmendmentKamala HarrisNAACP v Alabama
0 comment
Guest Contributor Mark Fitzgibbons

Mark J. Fitzgibbons is a constitutional lawyer and co-author with Richard A. Viguerie of The Law That Governs Government: Reclaiming The Constitution From Usurpers And Society's Biggest Lawbreaker.

Your life will be better if you click one of these

How the GOP can win the next...

December 5, 2019

Get ready for the RPV ‘Dirge’

December 4, 2019

The Consequences of Failure

December 4, 2019

Shaun Kenney returning to RPV

December 3, 2019

Make the 6th District Republican Party Great...

December 3, 2019

Retirement Lies and Statistics

December 3, 2019

Revolution

December 3, 2019

Trump Hasn’t Changed the Republican Party. But...

December 3, 2019

It’s Not About Caring; It’s About Control

December 2, 2019

Nick Freitas Announces Candidacy in Virginia’s 7th...

December 2, 2019

Fun Stuff

  • Holiday TV viewing schedule

  • Snow forecast Virginia winter 2019-2020

  • Reliving History with the Chicago Cubs

  • Innocents Abroad (II)

  • College destinations for TJHSST class of 2019

Advertisement

Advertisement

Sign Up for Email Alerts

Select list(s):

Advertisement

Recent Comments

  • Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and their spouses–photos – The … – Bugaluu on Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and their spouses–photos
  • Get ready for the RPV ‘Dirge’ – The Bull Elephant on 8 ideas to grow the GOP in Virginia
  • The Consequences of Failure – The Bull Elephant on A Conservative BHAG
  • The Consequences of Failure – The Bull Elephant on The Republicans Empty Wagon
  • The Consequences of Failure – The Bull Elephant on Nationalize the 2020 Elections – Prosperity. Security. Freedom.

Advertisement

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

@2017 Bull Elephant Media LLC.


Back To Top